A team only has 5 starters.
Some kids are happy to carve out a role for themselves off the bench.
Some kids will never be happy unless they're starting.
If you're a walk-on, and you can get a full scholarship at a low major or D2 school, why not transfer.
Under new proposed NCAA rules, everyone gets a one time transfer waiver where they can be eligible immediately. This also means that anyone who transfers into Syracuse is also immediately eligible.
Unfortunately, at many schools, more than 6 or 7 kids play, since the season is more than 30 games long. At our school, however, since we are caught in "Bubble Limbo", we have to play our 6 or 7 best players almost 40 minutes for every single game of the season to try to ensure we make the NCAA tournament.
This "short-term vision" / win now at any cost view of each season on the edge means that the bench players who used to play maybe 20 games out of 30+ each season, now only see half a dozen games, maybe a dozen, and the hooks are even quicker than ever.
As a result, players who can't match the skills of players from one or two or three decades ago, are being asked to play larger roles than their skills (and limitations) would warrant.
And so this has become a self-perpetuating cycle. Where we once could count on an experienced guard, wing and big man returning to form the foundation of next year's team, now just as players are starting to get good - and most are nowhere near being drafted - still depart to who knows what kind of future.
Part of this is college basketball, of course, but how many other teams have 3 of the top 5 or 10 players in the country in total minutes played year after year after year - and are still bubble teams! If the players you have aren't quite good enough, give the other guys a legitimate chance, in case they're better than who you are playing.
That's how I see things. Sure, some guys are better than others, but are any of them good enough to honestly be playing 40 minutes a game?